Listen Up! Direct from a Former Verity Executive: Google Search Lags
July 13, 2022
If anyone knows about falling behind in search and retrieval, it is probably a former Verity executive. Verity provided a decent security token to limit content access and created one of the world’s most sluggish indexing updating methods I had ever encountered. When was this? The late 1990s. Verity ended up as a contributor to the estimable Autonomy “search” offering. Therefore, experience in moving users to content is a core competency of former Verity executives.
I spotted a Googler who was a former Verity executive. The individual identified how a search and retrieval system does not meet the needs of the here and now user. The information is contained in what I think somewhat askew discussion of the Google finding system. The information appears in “Google Exec Suggests Instagram and TikToc Are Eating into Google’s Core Products, Search and Maps.” The write up includes some interesting observations. These comments reveal Google’s apparently slow realization that it is making money as it loses the hearts and minds of a couple of important customer segments. It also colors the outlines of Google’s hesitancy to identify one of its most difficult search problems: Amazon.com.
I noted these statements in the article:
he [the former Verity executive] somewhat offhandedly noted that younger users were now often turning to apps like Instagram and TikTok instead of Google Search or Maps for discovery purposes. “We keep learning, over and over again, that new internet users don’t have the expectations and the mindset that we have become accustomed to.” Raghavan said, adding, “the queries they ask are completely different.”
Experience matters. Verity went nowhere and ended up a footnote in Autonomy’s quest for customers, not technology and cutting edge functionality. Been there, seen that could be one of the triggers for this moment of candor.
Here’s another:
“In our studies, something like almost 40% of young people, when they’re looking for a place for lunch, they don’t go to Google Maps or Search,” he continued. “They go to TikTok or Instagram.” The figure sounds a bit shocking, we have to admit. Google confirmed to us his comments were based on internal research that involved a survey of U.S. users, ages 18 to 24. The data has not yet been made public, we’re told, but may later be added to Google’s competition site, alongside other stats — like how 55% of product searches now begin on Amazon, for example.
Flash back to the Verity era. New systems were becoming available. The wild and crazy Fast Search & Transfer folks were demonstrating a different almost “webby” approach to finding enterprise information. There was a sporty system from ISYS Search which provided a graphical interface, which — believe it or not — is still in the commercial market. There were quite fascinating folder oriented systems like Folio and Lextek. There were rumblings about semantics from Purple Yogi, later renamed Stratify, and also still available sort of from a records management company. Verity was lagging in the race to search domination.
So is Google. And a former Verity wizard identifies three companies which pose a bit of a challenge to a company which lacks focus, urgency, and hunger.
Add to this mea culpa the allegedly accurate statements reported in “Read the Memo Google’s CEO Sent Employees about a Hiring Slowdown.” The main idea in my opinion is that the mighty Googzilla is wandering in the wilderness with billions from online advertising. The problem is that developers are putting up trailer parks, slumurbia housing, and giant digital K-Marts. Googzilla is confused. Where’s the Moses to snap a leash on the beastie and pull the multi-ton monster to a valley filled with prey?
The trajectory for Alphabet Google YouTube DeepMind and the solving death folks seems to be discernable. Peak Google, yep. Now gravity. (No, I won’t quote from the endlessly readable Gravity’s Rainbow. Sorry, I lied. How about this line from the page turner?
You think you’d rather hear about what you call life: the growing, organic Kartell. But it’s only another illusion. A very clever robot. The more dynamic it seems to you, the more deep and dead, in reality, it grows.
Verity, mostly dead. The Google? Well, gravity. No pot of gold at the end of this digital rainbow I surmise.
Stephen E Arnold, July 13, 2022
Microsoft Security Team Helps Android Users. What about Microsoft Users? Meh?
July 13, 2022
Two items caught my attention this morning (July 4, 2022).
The first is “ALERT! Microsoft warns of dangerous Android malware on your phone that intercepts OTP, SMS too.” Locating this story might be tricky. I noted it on DailyHunt, an information service in India. The url displayed for me is in this link. Your mileage may vary. Yeah, the modern Internet. The article reports:
Toll fraud malware, a subcategory of billing fraud in which malicious applications subscribe users to premium services without their knowledge or consent, is one of the most prevalent types of Android malware.
What’s the fix? Here’s a helpful suggestion:
A rule of thumb is to avoid installing Android applications from untrusted sources (side loading) and always follow up with device updates.
The second was “Android Toll Fraud malware can subscribe users to premium services without consent.” Once again, the link to my source is this information highway signpost. Good luck because this may be similar to the now long gone Burma Shave signs. The article informed me that:
The toll fraud malware… purchases subscription on behalf of the user in a way that the overall process isn’t perceivable.
So what’s the fix?
One of the easiest ways to protect yourself from this malware is by download the latest version of available software update on your smartphone. Apart from that, avoid installing Android applications from untrusted sources. In addition to that, avoid granting SMS permissions, notification listener access, or accessibility access to any applications without a strong understanding of why the application needs it.
Helpful indeed.
Here’s a quick question: What about Microsoft security for its products and services? Meh. What’s important is a little bit of negative PR for the fun loving Googlers.
Stephen E Arnold, July 13, 2022
A Digital Medicine Show: Zucking Again?
July 13, 2022
Despite what Meta would have us believe, we learn from MIT Technology Review that “Facebook Is Bombarding Cancer Patients with Ads for Unproven Treatments.” Is Facebook actively prioritizing ad dollars over the wellbeing of its users, or is it just too cheap to hire enough fact checkers to keep the ads from slipping past its algorithm? Either way, research shows targeted ads for ineffective or even harmful treatments flooding cancer patients’ Facebook feeds. These nostrums can be extremely expensive, are usually not covered by insurance (for good reason), and often require travel out of the country. To make matters worse, chasing such bogus cures can steer patients away from effective medical care or, if they are pursuing both, actively interfere with treatments like chemotherapy. Reporter Abby Ohlheiser writes:
“Evidence from Facebook and Instagram users, medical researchers, and its own Ad Library suggests that Meta is rife with ads containing sensational health claims, which the company directly profits from. The misleading ads may remain unchallenged for months and even years. Some of the ads reviewed by MIT Technology Review promoted treatments that have been proved to cause acute physical harm in some cases. Other ads pointed users toward highly expensive treatments with dubious outcomes.”
See the article for details on ad campaigns from the quacks at CHIPSA and Verita Life. We also learn about consequences patients can face if they believe the carefully designed claims from such outfits:
“The danger is not simply that the treatments are unproven or ineffective. Some alternative cancer treatments advertised on the platform can cause physical harm. … Unproven treatments can also interact poorly with conventional treatments like chemotherapy should a patient decide to pursue alternative care on their own. Moreover, simply delaying the start of proven therapies by detouring into unproven ones can allow the cancer to advance, complicating and diminishing the effectiveness of further treatment.”
Facilities make a lot of money from these rackets, and it does not come from the pockets of big insurance. For example, we learn:
“One recent GoFundMe campaign for a cancer patient seeking treatment at CHIPSA included a screenshot of a bill for the ‘base amount’ he’d have to pay. It was $36,500 for three weeks of inpatient care in Mexico. That cost would increase once the facility decided on a treatment plan.”
Ohlheiser graciously states Facebook has done better in the last few years to stem the tide of false health claims, but suggests more fact checkers would help it do better. We agree that would be a good solution, if only the company were motivated to use it.
Cynthia Murrell, July 13, 2022
NSO Group: Sort of For Sale and More Remarkable PR
July 12, 2022
I read “Defense Firm Said US Spies Backed Its Bid for Pegasus Spyware Maker.” Okay, NSO Group, the backchannel produced and identified L3 Harris. The proposed acquisition encountered headwinds. Not particularly surprising. What’s interesting is the “play” a specialized software vendor gets. The estimable New York Times, which is enthusiastic in its business reporting, states:
The talks continued in secret until last month, when word of NSO’s possible sale leaked and sent all the parties scrambling. White House officials said they were outraged to learn about the negotiations, and that any attempt by American defense firms to purchase a blacklisted company would be met by serious resistance. Days later, L3Harris, which is heavily reliant on government contracts, notified the Biden administration that it had scuttled its plans to purchase NSO, according to three United States government officials, although several people familiar with the talks said there have been attempts to resuscitate the negotiations.
I don’t have a dog in this fight. What catches my attention is that NSO Group and the Pegasus words are attention magnets. Doesn’t it seem reasonable that discussions about a company providing specialized hardware, software, and services acquiring an intelware vendor be handled the old fashioned way: Quietly and confidentially.
I have learned that quiet and confidential are not part of today’s world. Consequently, I read the articles about NSO Group and the “deal” and think:
- Another outfit (possibly not American) has an opportunity to snag the systems and methods, software, data, and customers of the PR magnet
- The use of NSO Group and its outstanding marketing and sales methods have altered in a substantive way the specialized software and services market. The changes may not be net positives in my opinion. (Way to go zoom zoom executives.)
- The let’s reveal as much as possible may have some downstream consequences because there are more significant clear and present data actions underway that deserve more attention. Will I mention TikTok and its data? No, of course not.
How much longer will the dead horse take whacks? Probably months, maybe years? And to what end? Selling real news? Embarrassing a US company? Providing weaponized information about political behaviors? My hunch is that the reason is, “Hey, it’s just right.” Do you agree L3 Harris?
Stephen E Arnold, July 12, 2022
The Zuck Thing: We Capture Data. You Are Not Permitted to Capture Facebook Data
July 12, 2022
Does anyone remember Eric Schmidt, the alleged Google adult. That senior manager was outraged about open source information about him. You can refresh your memory by scanning this CNet article. Now the Zuckster is annoyed with third parties downloading data available to anyone from Facebook aka Zuckbook. The idea! Take. Info. From. Facebook. “Meta Sues a Site Cloner Who Allegedly Scraped over 350,000 Instagram Profiles” reports:
On Tuesday [July 5, 2022], the company filed separate federal lawsuits against a company called Octopus and an individual named Ekrem Ate?. According to Meta, the former is the US subsidiary of a Chinese multinational tech firm that offers data scraping-for-hire services to individuals and companies.
I find the big company reaction amusing. It is not as hilarious as the Ernsy & Young professionals who allegedly took short cuts to pass an ethics test. Nor is it up to the level of MBAism demonstrated by some McKinsey professionals in their fancy dancing about the “opioid” engagements. But it is pretty funny to me.
It might be a tough call if I were asked to identify the most surveillance oriented big tech company. I have some possible outfits in mind; for example, possible Amazon, Apple, Zuckbook, Google, Microsoft and a few others.
I wonder if Eric Schmidt will give the Zuck some tips on dealing with the outrageous behavior of third parties who gather and recycle data on a public Web site. Imagine, using software to obtain digital information.
The one percent don’t cotton to the “other percent” behaving in a manner offensive to the masters of the datasphere in my opinion.
Stephen E Arnold, July 12, 2022
Enterprise Search: Bold Predictions and a Massive Infowarp
July 12, 2022
Writing about enterprise search was a “thing” in the mid to late 2000s. There were big deals. Microsoft bought Fast Search & Transfer as an investigation in the firm’s financial methods. Then the Autonomy acquisition happened, and, as you may know, that sage continues to unfold. Vivisimo was acquired by IBM, and it’s rather useful clustering and metasearch system disappeared into the outstanding management environment of Big Blue. Enterprise search vendors flipped and pivoted: Some became customer support systems. Others morphed into smart news. A few from the Golden Age of Search hung in, and these firms are still pitching enterprise search but with a Silicon Valley, New Era spin.
I read “Enterprise Search Market to Witness Massive Growth by 2028: IBM Corporation, Lucid Work Incorporation [not the well funded name of the outfit, however], Microsoft Corporation, Dassault System” [not the correct spelling of the firm’s name]. How much can one trust a write up which misspells the names of the companies subjected to an intensive analysis process?
My answer is, “Not at all.”
Let’s take a look at some of the information in the write up.
The list of vendors included in the report is:
Attivio Software Incorporation
Coveo Corporation
Dassault Systems S.A. [The accepted spelling is Dassault Systèmes]
IBM Corporation
Lucid Work Incorporation. [Wow, the name of the company is LucidWorks. Pretty careless.]
Microsoft Corporation
SAP AG
Oracle Corporation
X1 Technologies Inc.
Okay, the names of some of the companies is incorrect. Bad.
Second, I loved this passage:
The research covers the most recent information about current events. This information is useful for businesses planning to produce significantly improved things, as well as for customers gaining an idea of what will be available in the future.
I have zero clue what this quoted passage means. Current events to me and many others involves the financial crisis, Russia’s non war war, and assorted pandemics. Monkeypox. Boo!
Third, did you notice that the vendor providing search and retrieval to numerous companies and to many vendors is not included in the report. I am referring to Elastic, cheerleader for the widely popular Elasticsearch. Why omit the vendor with many installations. I can see skipping over Algolia, Sinequa, and Yext, among others. But Elastic? Yikes.
Here’s my take on this report:
- I am not sure it will be useful
- I don’t see an indication that the features of the specific search engines are compared, contrasted, and evaluated. Oracle has a number of search solutions. Will these be evaluated or will the analysts focus on structured query language, ignoring Endeca and other systems the firm owns?
- Misspellings are easy to make with smart software helpfully replacing words automatically. However, getting the company names wrong is a red light.
Net net: Enterprise search will indeed witness – that is, be an observer of rapid growth in certain software sectors – I just think that enterprise search is now a utility. More modern methods of fusing and locating high value information are available. Buying a report which describes ageing dinosaurs may not be a prudent use of available funds.
Stephen E Arnold, July 12, 2022
Real News Adventures: USA Today Removes Nearly Two Dozen Stories with Alleged Fabrications
July 12, 2022
Fake news or shoddy management? Perhaps a bit of both. Mediaite reports, “USA Today Deletes 23 Articles Following Investigation into Alleged Fabrication by Reporter.” That is a lot of articles to slip past the editors, and it took a nudge from an outside source to put a stop to the allegedly fictional reporting. Writer Gabriela Miranda is also said to have interfered with the publication’s inquiry into the allegations, according to the New York Times piece that broke the news. Writer Jackson Richman quotes a statement USA Today posted on its website:
“After receiving an external correction request, USA Today audited the reporting work of Gabriela Miranda. The audit revealed that some individuals quoted were not affiliated with the organizations claimed and appeared to be fabricated. The existence of other individuals quoted could not be independently verified. In addition, some stories included quotes that should have been credited to others. As a result, USA Today removed 23 articles from its website and other platforms for not meeting our editorial standards. The headlines of the articles are listed below. Miranda has resigned as a reporter for USA Today and the USA Today Network.”
Well that’s embarrassing. The USA Today post goes on to list steps it will take to prevent false reporting in the future, or at least to catch it sooner. The assurances also serve to indicate what may have gone wrong this time, promising to:
“1. Improve our process for those who want to lodge complaints or request corrections.
2. Ensure stories have clear and sufficient identifying information for individuals quoted.
3. Ensure that reporters take appropriate steps at all times to verify source information.
4. Ensure that institutions are contacted to provide a response or statement if they are referenced in the story.
5. Apply additional scrutiny to sources found through blind connections on social media platforms, via email, etc.
6. Reinforce our standards for crediting other outlets for their work.”
We think those steps should have been fundamental to real journalism from the beginning, but what do we know? The statement ends with a list of the offending articles, in case one is curious, but clicking each headline only leads to a notice of removal. Will USA Today take its own vows seriously, or is this list just more fake news?
Cynthia Murrell, July 12, 2022
Microsoft and the Next Fix Problem
July 11, 2022
I spotted a now routine story about a bug in Microsoft’s software. The story “Windows 11’s ‘Resolved’ Outlook Search Bug Resurfaces: When’s the Next Fix?” reveals a key insight into the software giant’s technical method.
I noted this statement in the article about an issue with search functionality in the Outlook email program, one of the original landscape apps which are pretty much orthogonal to the mobile phone’s display:
When doing a search in Outlook on Windows 11 PCs, the email program sometimes fails to provide results relevant to recent messages…
Yep, search. Microsoft. Not working.
But the important facet of the story appears in the story headline; specifically, “When’s the next fix?”
The Microsoft softies have experienced many issues with search and retrieval. Unlike Elizabeth Barrett Browning, I shall not count the ways. However, I will point out that there is now a fatalism about Microsoft. Stuff goes wrong. Microsoft attempts to fix the problem. Then the problem comes back
Whether it is the outstanding security systems or the brilliance of Word’s fascinating approach to automatic numbering, fixes beget more fixes.
So here we are: Unfixable code, persistent issues, and a giant theme park of opportunities for people to make bad decisions, waste time, and hunt for security flaws.
Yep, next fix. Working11ood. Which time is the charm? Third, fourth, nth? Is there a macro for excellence? Wait, let’s roll that macro thing back.
Stephen E Arnold, July 11, 2022
Cloud Economics: The Customer Pays Because Going-Back Costs Are Too High
July 11, 2022
Short- and mid-term decisions may not be the optimal ones. Who cares about that pawn? Maybe in the end game, that pawn was on steroids. The player willing to give it up was unwilling to think about what lurks in the future.
I read “FedEx to Close Data Centers, Retire All Mainframes by 2024, Saving $400m.” The main idea is that mainframes are not suited to the zippy world of today. Furthermore, programmers –despite high-tech’s enthusiastic reduction in force moves – are not into the oddities of big iron. Those who do get jazzed with total-code working environments are rarer than a certain prince’s attending a female 15 year-old’s birthday party at the country club pool in Oxfordshire.
The write up reports:
Speaking during the FedEx investor day, FedEx CIO Rob Carter said the company is aiming for a ‘zero data center, zero mainframe’ environment based in the cloud, which will result in $400 million in savings annually. “We’ve been working across this decade to streamline and simplify our technology and systems,” he said. “We’ve shifted to cloud…we’ve been eliminating monolithic applications one after the other after the other…we’re moving to a zero data center, zero mainframe environment that’s more flexible, secure, and cost-effective.”
One way to view IBM’s approach to computing in the pre-person computer days was a person in handcuffs. IBMers disagree with my view. No problem. I also see cloud computing as a variation of the IBM approach to computing: Lock in and change are business benefits. Leasing mainframes and buying services each year is the equivalent of high-tech’s discovery of subscription-centric revenue models.
FedEx does not see the cloud as a variation on the mainframe strategy and its pricing structure. I thought one of the FedEx wizards was a Harvard MBA wizard.
The write up notes:
FedEx has previously said it planned to work with Intel and Switch to build Edge data centers at FedEx locations across the US. Whether this has actually been rolled out is unclear.
Trendy I suppose. I want to point out that there are some interesting comments about this alleged decision in the Y Combinator Hacker News comments. You can find these at this link.
One comment resonated with me: “Change gives the illusion of progress.”
Stephen E Arnold, July xx, 2022
Another Plea for Web Search That Sort of Works: Andrew Carnegie, Where Are You?
July 11, 2022
I am not going to do any history. Oh, well. Not really. Does anyone on TikTok know about Andrew Carnegie? Okay, let’s try another angle. How about a semi-rapacious dude with roots in Scotland who wanted to do good. Please, ignore the Carnegie era Monongahela River. The cheerful Mr. Carnegie came up with the idea of a free public library. Looking up information was a useful thing for poor folks and monopolistic steel barons alike. One person sort of fixed the “problem” of information access.
Flash forward to Backrub. Two bright young sprouts realized that a person had a tough time finding relevant information on Lycos and the other search engines available at “dawn” or the Internet. The fix? Take a little bit of Kleinberg, add a pinch of technology, use available computing resources whether others at Stanford University knew or cared, and mix in continuous feedback to a bundle of mostly automatic rules. More links in, good. Not many links in, meh. Then advertising. Yeah, that worked great for some. For others, ho ho ho.
The result is the weaponized findability environment of good old 2022.
What’s the fix? “Why the World Needs a Non-Profit Search Engine” explains that donors contribute money, and an objective Web search system will return relevant results. The write up states:
Sometimes I forget why I’ve taken on this crazy, huge task. Why am I building a search engine? Will it really be better than Google one day? Will people support it? Will people even use it? And then I read something like The Bullshit Web and I remember, that, yes, there is a point. Even if I make the web better for one person, it’s worth it. Because the way things are is just wrong. Search engines are in a unique position to fix the situation. Not only do we create a view on the world’s knowledge, we influence it too. If we promote bullshit-free sites, then people will create more bullshit-free sites. More importantly, search engines are a filter on the world’s knowledge. Do you really want your filter to be “whatever makes $SEARCH_ENGINE more money”, particularly when that means, “show ads instead of search results, and prioritize search results that also make us more money”? We can and should do better.
I want to point out that what may be required is an Andrew Carnegie type who already has money and a guilty conscience. It is a modern perception that if one can get lots and lots of people to contribute money, one can fund anything.
Nice idea. My response? “Where’s the Andrew Carnegie?”
Why?
Traffic means monetization. Do-gooding is walking on the information highway. One has to speed, and speed is infinitely expensive. Ergo: Monetization lies over the horizon.
Stephen E Arnold, July 11, 2022
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
